4 ms·

I'm not sure where you are going with this. Classifying the internet as a utility is a huge step towards net neutrality. This is what we want.

by xpose2000 12y ago

Shivetya 12y ago
however it is quite possible it will encumber providers and such with all sorts of new rules, forced compliance, etc. Forced compliance, as in "You are a utility and all such utilities must comply with NSA/CIA/FBI/ABC requirements" Maybe they will be brand it under some title like "Internet Bill of Rights" and watch as people don't read the fine print. All I know is, if I waited for the regulated utility known as the phone company to have provided me with faster internet, let alone a good phone connection during a thunderstorm, it would never have happened without competition.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > Forced compliance, as in "You are a utility and all such utilities must comply with NSA/CIA/FBI/ABC requirements" We have that now, without net neutrality.
  - VLM 12y ago
    At the federal level more so than state/local. The feds have had free access to everything for a long time, what you're likely to see after utility conversion is the local cops demanding access to all ebay/CL traffic for an entire city to track down stolen property fences or similar actions. Give me a list of everyone in my district who ever bought lockpicks or lockpicking stuff.
- chipgap98 12y ago
  While I agree that there could be such rules that accompany a reclassification of the internet as a utility, net neutrality is what so many people have been pushing for. Yes there could be unwanted side-effects of such a classification, we have to cross that bridge when we get to it.
- ende 12y ago
  I don't think you are aware of the current situation. There is no competition among broadband ISPs. Each player has carved out its own exclusivity zone free of any competition. This is partly out of necessity of not having overlapping/redundant physical infrastructures, and partly the result of these companies buying out local and state officials. Common carrier regulations were established (as far back as ancient Rome) to counter this kind of situation. It basically states that because such monopolies are unavoidable, in order for the company to enjoy such privileged status it must be regulated as a public utility and impartial market player; and most importantly a common carrier cannot use its monopoly position to corner the market downstream (such as shutting out NetFlix in favor of Comcast's own streaming service). Essentially, we cannot create more competition at the broadband utility level but we can prevent monopoly power from begetting more monopoly power. Common carrier is regulation purposed towards facilitating a free market.
- adventured 12y ago
  One thing that is guaranteed to occur, is that the US Government will regulate the Internet to a greater degree every year that goes by. It's what they do with all segments of the economy, and that regulation has been accelerating for decades. Tech had been largely spared, but the Feds have been increasingly pushing their nose into every area of tech the last decade. What will ultimately happen, is the government will regulate the Internet so tightly, it will become extremely difficult, time consuming, and costly to create a start-up (while the technology cost will continue to fall). This process will not be fought by the existing tech giants, because they will think they benefit from it by limiting competition with artificial barriers. It's the exact same thing that has played out in every other major segment of the economy, and it's exactly what is about to happen to the Internet. These days will be viewed as the unregulated wild west, when you could spend $50 and create a start-up without hardly a concern.
  - ArtDev 12y ago
    Comcast and others are against Net neutrality. They want your $50 startup to have to pay for a "fast lane". For comparison, the electricity company can't restrict your wattage just because you are a business.

I'm not sure where you are going with this. Classifying the internet as a utility is a huge step towards net neutrality. This is what we want.

Shivetya 12y ago

however it is quite possible it will encumber providers and such with all sorts of new rules, forced compliance, etc. Forced compliance, as in "You are a utility and all such utilities must comply with NSA/CIA/FBI/ABC requirements" Maybe they will be brand it under some title like "Internet Bill of Rights" and watch as people don't read the fine print. All I know is, if I waited for the regulated utility known as the phone company to have provided me with faster internet, let alone a good phone connection during a thunderstorm, it would never have happened without competition.

dragonwriter 12y ago
> Forced compliance, as in "You are a utility and all such utilities must comply with NSA/CIA/FBI/ABC requirements" We have that now, without net neutrality.
- VLM 12y ago
  At the federal level more so than state/local. The feds have had free access to everything for a long time, what you're likely to see after utility conversion is the local cops demanding access to all ebay/CL traffic for an entire city to track down stolen property fences or similar actions. Give me a list of everyone in my district who ever bought lockpicks or lockpicking stuff.
chipgap98 12y ago
While I agree that there could be such rules that accompany a reclassification of the internet as a utility, net neutrality is what so many people have been pushing for. Yes there could be unwanted side-effects of such a classification, we have to cross that bridge when we get to it.
ende 12y ago
I don't think you are aware of the current situation. There is no competition among broadband ISPs. Each player has carved out its own exclusivity zone free of any competition. This is partly out of necessity of not having overlapping/redundant physical infrastructures, and partly the result of these companies buying out local and state officials. Common carrier regulations were established (as far back as ancient Rome) to counter this kind of situation. It basically states that because such monopolies are unavoidable, in order for the company to enjoy such privileged status it must be regulated as a public utility and impartial market player; and most importantly a common carrier cannot use its monopoly position to corner the market downstream (such as shutting out NetFlix in favor of Comcast's own streaming service). Essentially, we cannot create more competition at the broadband utility level but we can prevent monopoly power from begetting more monopoly power. Common carrier is regulation purposed towards facilitating a free market.
adventured 12y ago
One thing that is guaranteed to occur, is that the US Government will regulate the Internet to a greater degree every year that goes by. It's what they do with all segments of the economy, and that regulation has been accelerating for decades. Tech had been largely spared, but the Feds have been increasingly pushing their nose into every area of tech the last decade. What will ultimately happen, is the government will regulate the Internet so tightly, it will become extremely difficult, time consuming, and costly to create a start-up (while the technology cost will continue to fall). This process will not be fought by the existing tech giants, because they will think they benefit from it by limiting competition with artificial barriers. It's the exact same thing that has played out in every other major segment of the economy, and it's exactly what is about to happen to the Internet. These days will be viewed as the unregulated wild west, when you could spend $50 and create a start-up without hardly a concern.
- ArtDev 12y ago
  Comcast and others are against Net neutrality. They want your $50 startup to have to pay for a "fast lane". For comparison, the electricity company can't restrict your wattage just because you are a business.